Iberian Bell Beaker Y-DNA and mtDNA

"moreover to proceed to assign a 100% for a unique sample in a village is, in the most diplomatic way that i can express it, to don't understand the basics about statistics"? So, do you think this invalidate my previous comment in some way?

I'm still trying to find 46 LBK samples in Karsdorf among all known Brandt papers. "in the most diplomatic way that i can express" This is falsify data to support your theory and misinform deliberately to other forum members.
Don't beat yourself too much. We couldn't get to berun either with our explanations on various subjects. Unfortunately he is immune to statistics and pattern recognition, though a nice guy in general.
 
Results from Unambiguous Bell Beaker:

Bell Beaker from Kromsdorf 4550 ybp = 0% H + 100% ( T1a, K1, I1a1, W5a, U2e, U5a1 )

Bell Beaker from Benzingerode-Heimburg 4300/4200 ybp = 0% H + 100% ( T2a, W1, U5a )

Bell Beaker from Quedlinburg 4300/4200 ybp = 50% H5/H1 + 50% ( T2e, J1c, U5a, U5b )

Bell Beaker from Rothenschirmbach 4300/4200 ybp = 60% H5/H3 + 40% ( K1a2 )

Bell Beaker from Alberstedt 4300/4200 ybp = 100% H5/H3 + 0% ( - )

1- The oldest tested Bell Beaker population is Kromsdorf and there is not found any H carrier.
2- H5 is the only H haplogroup shared among all of these Bell Beaker populations where H is found.
3- H5 is found in a 8350 ybp individual from Anatolia.
4- K1a2 is found in a 8350 ybp individual from Anatolia.
5- W1 is found in a 8350 ybp individual from Anatolia.
6- T1a is found in a 9500 ybp individual from Jordan.
7- T2e is found in a 7500 ybp individual from Neolithic Hungary.
8- J1c is found in a 9900 ybp individual from Neolithic Iran.
9- H3 is found in a 7300 ybp individual from Neolithic Portugal.


Other BB populations from Germany, Czech R. and Denmark:

39% H/H46/H44/H1af/H2a and 61% non-H (K1c, U5a, W, T1a, T2a, U5b, U4c, U4*) Samples: 18

H2a found in Kumtepe 6700 ybp
H46 found in Karsdorf 7100 ybp
 
@Alpenjager, Karsdorf samples are in the excel that you posted, lines 126-171 of the third page, even so I caught now that all individuals were sampled twice, so the numbers are for all the half... but the percents remain the same.

Maybe I don't understand patterns so well, but if a village is 18 percent Schmith and in the next day it is added a 30 percent of newcomers named Ferreira... I think i would have some 48 percent of people with a nickname refering to smithers?
 
@MOESAN, take into account that the spread of the BB surely was not direct, there were surely generations to reach Germany and their aDNA was not like in the beginning. There is the autosomal i na paper refered already here were such BB ploted between the expected pops. For the mtDNA in the paper of "Mitochondrial DNA from el Mirador" realy it plots just with Neolithic Portugal (70% H), being the ancient Central European cultures far as the HG.

recall: the partial surprise for me is the apparently not too big difference between today Spain and ancient German BBs concerning Y-R1b+mtH spite their auDNA is different as a whole.
As you can see i'm very cautious when speaking about BBs: what kind of BBs?
- Generations? Surely 3000/2900 BC to 2500 BC it's a long enough time. Vut someones think the first BBs, and the propagation of their typical first luggage did not take so much times to reach very remote regions of West. A first phase could have seen no colonization but rather fast travels of possible prospection.
- Is there an unique BBs phenomenon: could we not imagine two origins or at least two roads for BBs? (by instance I was imagining an eastarn people come from either Anatolia or Western Black Sea, near Carpathians, who could have taken two routes and known different environments and admictures before converging in Germany, but at this stade it's only a peplum secnario)
- After a first explorating stage, I suppose BBs intergrated diverse Chalcol societies rather than they colonized them from Southern Portugal to Poland. I see them rather as a catalizor for societies which were not exactly the same ones (some could be Chalco from East mediterranean, other Chalco from North-central Europe with Steppes ties?). What we see as a big travel from South-West to North-East could be in fact a progressive homogeneization of pops by moves from region to region with a patrolinear aspect implying wives changing place more often, homogeneization launched by progress and trade at larger scales than before, due to local elites taking part in the game under BBs impulse - whatever their ethny - No complete shared way of life, no uniformity, but differences in burying and so on, between diverse great regions labelled "BB" at the end.
- Sure, a too small number of men could have had hard work to create what seems nevertheless a big change. But nothing points to a great demic move from Iberia only. I wonder if the final success fo "BBs" is not the fact of their maybe proto-Italo-Liguro-Celtic "pupils" or "snob supporters", with in fact an expansion of Y-R1b males, taking progressively the opposite way of the females place-to-place moves: when I say move, I think osmosis, very slow.
- Have we the mt-DNA of the VERY LATE NEOLITHIC PRE-BB/PRE-CWC? i 'll try to pick what is accessible. I think a progressive osmosis of basic people had begun already since the Megaliths period, seeing Atlantic people gaining ground more in East and North. The Megalithic period seemingly saw an increse in pop in Denmark. This civilisation needed men and men I think (and women too!) and I think the Megalithers of Western Europe had their part in the FunnelBK culture along with others come from Eastern Europe, maybe Steppes.
- mt H question is not simple: some mt-H (H1 sure, maybe H3) can have reached Portugal BEFORE REAL NEOLITHIC, from South-East Europe.
others mt-H are easterners with a different "recent" story. So what seems a revolution of the mtDNA for us could have been very more subtile.
I 'll search.
Thanks for amiable debate not always the case on some of our threads!
 
For the megalithic expansion I have not idea if it was demic or cultural. This culture appears after the first neolithics are well stablished and became well populated. The megaliths appear as a way to display the richness and capacity of each local clan.

BB are more complex. In Catalonia they appear in a estrange way if they were migrants as they continue old burials (caves, megaliths, hypogeums...). It seems that they followed the same in other areas. It's not the usual invader behavior. Being from Portugal they had two factors not present in other European regions: metalurgy and above all dense villages, so they had the demographic potential and a new technology. But realy I don't know which factor aided more to the spread: overpopulation? invaders with daggers and arrows? Metalurgic services? they made the best beers? horses or donkeys allowing bigger exchange nets? Demographic crisis in other late neolithic cultures? In whichever case it seems granted that the migration was big: Western Europe is a big area but they were capable to cover the most, if they would be a bunch of men only spreading into few regions would be enough.
 
For the megalithic expansion I have not idea if it was demic or cultural. This culture appears after the first neolithics are well stablished and became well populated. The megaliths appear as a way to display the richness and capacity of each local clan.

BB are more complex. In Catalonia they appear in a estrange way if they were migrants as they continue old burials (caves, megaliths, hypogeums...). It seems that they followed the same in other areas. It's not the usual invader behavior. Being from Portugal they had two factors not present in other European regions: metalurgy and above all dense villages, so they had the demographic potential and a new technology. But realy I don't know which factor aided more to the spread: overpopulation? invaders with daggers and arrows? Metalurgic services? they made the best beers? horses or donkeys allowing bigger exchange nets? Demographic crisis in other late neolithic cultures? In whichever case it seems granted that the migration was big: Western Europe is a big area but they were capable to cover the most, if they would be a bunch of men only spreading into few regions would be enough.

don't underestimate how quick a small tribe can procreate
you don't need a mass immigration to become genetically dominant
IMO that is what BB people did

as for megaliths, I think they came with oxens
 
recall: the partial surprise for me is the apparently not too big difference between today Spain and ancient German BBs concerning Y-R1b+mtH spite their auDNA is different as a whole.

I think you're confusing Iberian chalcolithic with Iberian BB. We have no Iberian BB DNA.
 
@Alpenjager, Karsdorf samples are in the excel that you posted, lines 126-171 of the third page, even so I caught now that all individuals were sampled twice, so the numbers are for all the half... but the percents remain the same.

Maybe I don't understand patterns so well, but if a village is 18 percent Schmith and in the next day it is added a 30 percent of newcomers named Ferreira... I think i would have some 48 percent of people with a nickname referring to smithers?
Actually, because village will grow to 30% of more people village will have 130% people when compared to 100% from before arrival of Ferreira. In this case the old 18% will get smaller of 30%, to about 14% of new population. Likewise 30% won't be 30 anymore but 23%, so in total 37% smiths. Unless you meant that 30% of Ferreiras of total of population after they joind.

In numbers. Let's say population of village was 100 people with 18 Smiths. After 30 Ferreiras are added there will be 130 people in the village. 130 is new 100%. In this case 18 Smiths is (18*100%/130=) 13.8%, and 30 Ferreiras (30*100%/130=) is 23%, in total smiths are 36.8% of population.

Your calculation is right if in population of 100% we already have 18 Smiths and 30 Ferreiras, but not if 30 Ferreiras are an addition to existing population.
 
Last edited:
Ok... I supposed that the main concept would be taken and I was not to get the calculator, but if we go we go... so to get a 48% from a previous 18% it would be needed to add up 45 Ferreiras for each 100 old villagers: quite impressive the population change... and if samples were not first generation, so that many male Ferreiras had local mtDNA recent ancestry, the initial numbers could be even higher.
 
I think you're confusing Iberian chalcolithic with Iberian BB. We have no Iberian BB DNA.

I'm not confusing anything, Bicicleur. I 'm just comparing ancient BB of Central Europe, and TODAY Iberians, who stay apart on PCA plottings, spite they have close %s for total mt-H and dominance for Y-R1b, even if in C-Europe BBs R1b seem almost 100%. I know comparing ancient and modern population could mistake us, but surely not completely. So supposed close enough males and females ligneages would, theorically, give close enough populations on PCA. Or it proves that today Iberians are descendant of other Y-R1b (+) mtH people we have to find in history, but not from BBs, or BBS of C-Europe were not as a whole BBs of 3000 BC Iberia (what I 'm should think easily enough, wiating more info). It's all. As all of us here I wait for true Iberian BBS anDNA.
 
Maybe it's a "problem" with autosomals. I don't know realy but Puertoricans may have similar Iberian haplos but plot quite different by inserting little admixture from native and black people. Extreme example but i think that the basics could be applied to Central Europe.
 
Maybe it's a "problem" with autosomals. I don't know realy but Puertoricans may have similar Iberian haplos but plot quite different by inserting little admixture from native and black people. Extreme example but i think that the basics could be applied to Central Europe.
It's not the last word but it could help to ponder

... National Geographic’s Genographic Project researches locations where different groups historically intermixed to create a modern day melting pot. Collaborating with 326 individuals from southeastern Puerto Rico and Vieques, the Genographic Project conducted the first genetic testing in the area with the goal to gain more information about their ancient past and learn how their DNA fits into the human family tree. The results, just published in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology, paint a picture of vast historic complexity dating back some 5,000 years, to the first Caribbean peoples.
Our Genographic team learned some key pieces of information that helped us gain more insight into the peopling of the Caribbean. Most surprisingly, we found that roughly 60% of Puerto Ricans carry maternal lineages of Native American origin. Native American ancestry, higher than nearly any other Caribbean island, originated from groups migrating to Puerto Rico from both South and Central America. Analysis of the Y Chromosome DNA found that no Puerto Rican men (0%) carried indigenous paternal lineages, while more than 80% were West Eurasian (or European).
This leads us to conclude that the Y chromosomes (inherited strictly paternally) of Tainos were completely lost in Puerto Rico, whereas the mitochondrial DNA (inherited strictly maternally) survived long and well. This stark difference has been seen in other former colonies (Brazil, Cuba, Jamaica), but the gender dichotomy appears strongest in the Spanish-speaking Americas. A look into the rest of the Puerto Rican genome using the Genographic Project’s custom genotyping tool, the GenoChip, sheds some light on what may have happened during Spanish colonial times to create this ancestral imbalance.
The average Puerto Rican individual carries 12% Native American, 65% West Eurasian (Mediterranean, Northern European and/or Middle Eastern) and 20% Sub-Saharan African DNA. To help explain these frequencies in light of the maternal and paternal differences, I used basic math and inferred that it would take at least three distinct migrations of hundreds of European men each (and practically no European women) to Puerto Rico, followed by intermixing with indigenous women. It also would necessitate the complete decimation of indigenous men (but not women), to account for those numbers. These results are surprising and also shed light into a dark colonial past that, until now, had remained somewhat unclear
 
By sure there are many varieties of admixture to take into account. For the BB it will be solved once we will know also the Y DNA variable.

For the case of Puerto Rico I don't think that the Spanish were found in chasing natives, the main objective was to get goods and if you kill natives you make more difficult to extract the goods.

The most easy explanation would be the effect of a kind of ethnic osmosis: native women would be attracted to live with newcomers by their technological advantages and increased security (no intertribal wars), and of course many men alone would be happy attracting such women. Native men were not allowed to enter in the new society or maybe they rejected it as to prevent to lose their cultural traits, the case is that the Spaniards prefered to buy African slaves for hard work instead to chase natives, so the native men were not integrated in a way or another in such colonial society. But after each generation there would be less native women available for the native men... so that their Y DNA finaly was lost.
 
my aim was to show we cannot compare the Puerto Rico case proposed by yourself to the BB's and today Iberians cases ; so the problem of Y+MT discrepancy with auDNA is still there
 
concerning BBs and their demic imput there is something interesting mentioned lately in 'For what they were we are' about not exactly the peopling but rather the demography of Ireland between 4000 and 2000 BC through te sight of archeology, something which could concern the BBs problem among others.
 
DNA Land Ancestry Report for I0118 from Alberstedt (Bell Beaker / CWC mix) looks interesting:

http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/copperbronzeagedna.shtml

ALB3.png


https://s17.postimg.io/dta0dx4z3/I0118.png

It shows high "Southwestern European" (which is equivalent to Iberian, Basque, South French):

I0118.png
 
Tomenable, Alberstedt might be scoring in Iberian because his people contributed ancestry to Iberians. You should run Neolithic/Chalcolithic Iberians through DNA.Land. You should also ask David Wesolski what formal stats to run in order to test whether any ancient genomes have genealogical connections to moderns. He'll definitly run the tests for you.
 
The run done with the R1a I0104 (Esperstedt, Germany), CWC, didn't had such ancestry, and the unique change among he and "Barbara Miller" is the appearance of the BB, so it would be good to check other programs if they agree or not, but with Occam's razor all it has much sense.
 
After rejecting flawed data, nowadays it's known that the Balearic Islands where first colonized quite late (around 2300 BC) by Bell Beakers, from "The Chronology of the First Settlement of the Balearic Islands":

This arrival must have been later than the functional disappearance of the Epipalaeolithic and early Neolithic industries in the surrounding area (Ramis and Alcover 2001b). The materials found in the Balearic archipelago which have the earliest chronology (i.e. wristguards, tabular flint knives, or megalithic architecture, decorated pottery of the Bell Beaker tradition) may be no earlier than the Bronze Age.

So ancient DNA samples from there could be used as a time capsule to know the BB genes, at least for those in East Iberia. The paper "Dissecting mitochondrial dna variability of balearic populations from the bronze age to the current era" provides 138 ancient mtDNA from Minorca and Majorca, and after rejecting the Majorcan samples (coming from two outlier necropolises and a post-Roman cemetery), the data from Minorca (42 cases of the Bronze Age) is: 50% H, 29% U5, 5% K, 5% J, 5% T, 2% W, 5% R0.
 
DNA Land Ancestry Report for I0118 from Alberstedt (Bell Beaker / CWC mix) looks interesting:

http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/copperbronzeagedna.shtml

ALB3.png


https://s17.postimg.io/dta0dx4z3/I0118.png

It shows high "Southwestern European" (which is equivalent to Iberian, Basque, South French):

I0118.png

17% SW Med is not huge! and if BBs picked females here and there, what is very possible, we have not to be amazed by such a proportion which could have been not exceptional even among other people than BBs ones, in W Europe of the time. By the way other runs give even more Med but it doesn't change the question. We don"t know how were the first BBs and the Germany ones were still, globally speaking, Central European autosomes mix as a mean and not "Iberians".
And the answer of FireHaired is not without interest too.
 

This thread has been viewed 65946 times.

Back
Top